rich1.0npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2phttps://nostr.ae/npub1xqshkqv2g7uea4xzqwvmgjcz7u8vfavw6aazs999v0azsv3w7u3qpymc2pnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2011-12-20 🗒️ Summary of this message: Developers should not create their own onion network for Bitcoin, as it is difficult to achieve security and anonymity. Instead, they should use Tor. 📝 Original message:On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Jordan Mack <jordanmack at parhelic.com>wrote: > On 12/18/2011 1:19 PM, Stefan Thomas wrote: > > Let those who want anonymity connect through Tor, Freenet, etc. It's > > easy to add anonymity via an extra layer, but it is impossible to add > > performance on top of a slow system. > > That's a very good point. This is needless complication at the protocol > level. Alternatives, like Tor, could be used to provide the desired > Agreed. Please don't roll your own onion network. It is very non-trivial to get security and anonymity to an acceptable level. Securing cryptocurrency itself is a big enough challenge already. Another reason it is better to use Tor is because of the mixing effect. A bitcoin-specific onion network would be subject to easy traffic analysis if it only carries Bitcoin messages. effect. Developers could even choose to integrate Tor functionality into > the client itself at some point. > Yes, good idea. I've thought about making a "bitcoin tor bundle", analogous to the firefox Tor bundle that is available from the Tor site itself. Probably would need to package the block chain with it, as downloading that over Tor takes ages and causes unnecessary load on the network... Wladimir -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20111220/5d6c4c2e/attachment.html>